> > It seems the only equipment that show the objects name are Kenwoods (at least the D7). My T2 puts the originator on the LCD but the object name on the GPS display. For an object, the D7 actually shows the the object name and in the comment field the comment. For a repeater, the object name is the frequency and the status will give tone and range. For example, see objects on APRS.FI from PNRDVL. There are 3 of them. Actually 4, but one is not currently being updated.
> > Here is one of the objects:
> > Source callsign: PNRDVL
> > APRS object: 147.135NH
> > Comment: T100 r20m S.Uncan MT
> > The question is, what information is the most useful to an observer? Is it the originator of the object or the object itself?
> The scrolling station log is simply there to show that traffic is coming
> in from the stations being displayed. The actual object name is placed
> on the map and is also available if you click on a station in the
> scrolling display to learn more about what it said, not just the fact
> that it said something. I would have to say that what's most important
> to the observer isn't that they heard about an object, but they'll scan
> the map to find the closest antenna object and click it to get the details.
I do understand your point of view. From my perspective, as a mobile (moving in a vehicle with a laptop/32) user, the object name makes the most sense, but then that is probably because my station puts up three repeater objects a few minutes apart. Since I am the only one interested I'll gladly rescind the request.
> > The D710 allows the user to set the radio to a repeater object if it is properly formed. I actually would like the repeater objects to be stored in a separate file for access by software that can program my FT857D. It would sure be handy when travelling to areas other than my own.
> Got any specs on that "separate file" that FT857D programming software
> can access. I've certainly not heard of such software, but then, I
> don't own an FT857D either!
I don't have specs yet. FTBCAT has the capability of using a list for the radio to scan through. That is the closest I can come up with. Maybe work can be done in this general direction.
For a bit of the view from my world: When I see mobile rigs in vehicles, most are the 'standard' mobile radio. An example might be the FT1500M or the FT8900 which has memories and a programmable VFO but not a computer interface for direct programming. Yes memories can be programmed but not without going through some sort of special power up cloning sequence. The user programs the radio for local use and forgets about it. Then, when they go on a trip, the user might look at Travel Plus and make a list and program the radio with it. Or they might print a list out and key everything in through the buttons on the faceplate or microphone keypad while travelling. I did both of these and it was a serious pain in the backside. However, my FT51r (the bestest HT ever!) is absolute best radio to program that way.
I did the Travel Plus thing with my FT857 for my last two trips (1500 miles or so) and out of the 2000+ repeaters, I had to pick less than 200 and only on VHF. I announced myself on every repeater that I picked hoping for a contact. I found a lot of OFF repeaters. I did get one contact on the first trip and none on the second. And again programming the frequency and tone through the face and microphone buttons is a pain. There are too many menus to cycle through.
The cool thing is the FT857 has a CAT interface. So now, like the D710, there is potential to receive a repeater object and program the radio to it on a mouse click. I am not requesting that ability because ultimately it wouldn't work with the project plan I am working on. This is where a separate file is handy. And at the moment the file can be an any format because I can read whatever is provided. The raw data packet would be just fine. If the D710 can decode it, then any application that reads it be be able to decode it as well since that would mean the packet/comment was formatted correctly. Again, I am not close to project implementation so writing to a file is only a thought. This was really thrown into the mix to be thought provoking.
> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - The best thing about being an author is that I get
> to do it MY way! (But I'd like that way to work for others as well!)
I do a lot of things my way too (if not most). I can appreciate that! And I only implement another way when it is deemed reasonable to me, like when my employer has a different way, or when the officer doesn't like me driving on the sidewalk. ;)
You are doing a great service for the APRS community! I appreciate it! You are offering your skills for free and ultimately I really have no expectations that any of my requests will even be considered. I am just grateful to at least have the dialog. I really hope that you don't decide that dealing with customers is more that you bargained for and leave the project where it is. We can be opinionated when it comes to ideas. And I will be that first to say I am not humble about my opinions. They are all based on facts. ;)